IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA
Citation: R. v. West, 2005 NSSC 329
Date: 20051201
Docket: CRSBW No. 224615
Registry: Bridgewater
Between:
Her Majesty the Queen
v.
William Fenwick West
LIBRARY HEADING
Judge: The Honourable Justice C. Richard Coughlan
Heard: September 13-16, 19-23, 29-30 and October 3, 2005, in Bridgewater, Nova Scotia
Decision: December 1, 2005 (re Voir Dire)
Subject: Criminal Law - Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Right to be Informed of Reasons for Arrest or Detention
Criminal Law - Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Right to Counsel
Criminal Law - Evidence - Confessions - Voluntariness
Summary: The accused was detained and not informed of the reason for his detention. No evidence was obtained during his detention. The accused was arrested and informed of the reason for his arrest.
At the time of detention, the accused was not informed of right to retain and instruct counsel. At the time of his arrest, the accused was informed of his right to retain and instruct counsel, and subsequently was given the opportunity to contact a lawyer.
The Crown seeks to introduce statements the accused made to the police on December 19, 1998. Evidence was adduced of the time the accused was in police custody prior to giving the statements.
Issue: 1. Was the accused’s right upon arrest or detention to be informed promptly of the reasons therefore infringed?
2. Was the accused’s right upon arrest or detention to retain and instruct counsel without delay, and to be informed of that right, infringed?
3. Did the Crown prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the statements made by the accused were voluntary?
Result: The accused’s right on detention to be informed promptly of the reasons therefore was infringed. As no evidence was obtained during the time the accused was detained, there is no evidence to be subjected to analysis pursuant to s. 24(2) of the Charter. There was no breach of the accused’s right upon arrest to be informed promptly of the reasons therefore.
The accused’s right on detention to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right was violated. As no evidence was obtained during the period of the accused’s detention, there is no evidence to be subjected to analysis pursuant to s. 24(2) of the Charter.
The accused’s right upon arrest to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right was not infringed.
The Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the statements made by the accused on December 19, 1998 were voluntary and should be admitted as evidence during the trial
THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION. QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.